Earlier this week, millions of Australians tuned in to see Sir David Attenborough’s documentary on Tasmania’s unique wilderness areas and threatened species. These are the same areas and species that are under direct threat from the Hodgman Government.

The world is watching. This World Environment Day, the Liberals must abandon their assault on protected areas - like the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area - where much of Sir David Attenborough’s documentary was filmed.

The Liberals’ anti-environment, pro-private development agenda is putting the State’s world renowned protected areas at risk - just as they are being celebrated on the world stage.

Under Will Hodgman’s leadership, the Liberals have:

- Opened publicly owned Parks and the TWWHA up for private exploitation under the EOI Process
- Been condemned by UNESCO for their attempts to revoke additions to the TWWHA and then to log and mine its wilderness
- Weakened the TWWHA Management Plan, to facilitate development
- Plan to open up 356 000ha of High Conservation Forests to logging
- Logging threatened species habitat in takayna/Tarkine
- Attempted to open 4WD tracks in the takayna/Tarkine
- Major expansion of the salmon industry, without public say or environmental checks
- Slashed funding to Park and Wildlife and Threatened Species Unit in DPIPWE
- Reversed the Labor Green Government ban on 1080
- Axed the Climate Change Ministry and Tasmanian Climate Action Council, and watered down the Tasmanian Climate Plan
- Facilitating the kunanyi/Mt Wellington cable car
- Proposed plans for a privately run Cradle Mountain cable car
- Allowed private companies to own and exclusively access public lands through the Office of the Coordinator General
- Given landholder consent for the Dover woodchip facility

A missing piece from Sir David Attenborough’s tribute to Tasmania was the biggest threat to our unique, island wilderness – the Liberals in government.

In their quest to being millions more tourists here, the Liberals are putting at risk everything that makes Tasmania special.

Uniquely Tasmanian threatened species that star on the international stage, like the Tasmanian devil, the giant freshwater lobster, and the eastern quoll are all at risk from logging and the wilderness destruction that accompanies the secretive Parks EOI process.

Tasmania’s reserves, national parks and World Heritage Area are all protected for their unique natural and cultural values. They are public lands, not to be sold or gifted to private developers for private profits.

Our State’s high conservation value forests are home to devils, quolls, eagles, parrots and other majestic creatures, but they’re earmarked for destruction under the Liberals’ plan.

On World Environment Day, on behalf of all current and future Tasmanians, the Greens are calling on the Liberals to walk away from their assault on our forests, protected areas, mountains and waterways.

A beautiful picture heads a fine article by a quality Green with the soul to value it, but “calling on the Liberals to walk away from their assault on our forests, protected areas, mountains and waterways” is like asking a fire to stop burning.

Newton’s First law of Motion (simplified) states: “Everything keeps going as it is unless acted upon by an external force.”

A fire will not self-extinguish in response to requests, just as the Liberals will not repent or reform when beseeched.

It now seems clear that long overdue changes for the better will only occur when suitable external forces are applied, and the essential word here, instead of wasting effort trying to reason with automatons without souls, is “force.”

A truly democratic vote has been, in recent times, the traditional means of securing peaceful change, but in March this year Tasmanian voters revealed themselves as unworthy of it, preferring instead to be conned.

My Dad used to say “Nothing is worse than a man with whom you cannot reason.”

He was thinking of men. I’m thinking it better applies to Liberals.

Posted by Peter Bright on 05/06/18 at 09:39 PM

Oh folks, you are so damn lucky as I have only a few comments about Cassy’s annual bitching program against the government for World Environment Day!

As far as this cable car business goes, it is looking unlikely a cable car will be built on Mt Wellington. Council appears to have solved the problem and is in the process of providing a contractor with all weather 30 seater 4x4 bus service to the summit.

Given the balance of tourism experiences that will be available, I am suggesting it is more likely a cable car lift would be suitable at the Cradle Mountain area where I am sure larger numbers of visitors who don’t have the time or energy to walk the tracks will have the golden opportunity to enjoy the experience with the comfort of a cable car lift type operation.

PWS will never have a bottomless pit of money to run its operations, as much of our protection of resources and property is now tied up with fuel reduction activities.

It’s either more destructive wildfires swooping on our natural environment, including our built up daily living environment, or conducting regular burning of the bush to protect lives, property and nature.

It all costs money these days as it’s a highly regulated activity. It’s not a fire-stick freebie. The days are past when the local farmer lit the bush and let it rip into adjoining Crown bush.

I think that a lot of PWS money will be sucked up into proactive fire management across the board.

The Dunalley wildfire was the key indicator for the future so we cannot afford to be complacent and “Cassy’s lot” have to realise that priorities have to be set to save our natural world with the continued regular and extensive use of fire.

The lack of respect being shown for his fellow Tasmanians will deliver nothing useful to the green movement politically.

Posted by Simon Warriner on 06/06/18 at 04:55 AM

Simon Warriner raises objections to some of my “wishes” as expressed in Comment #3, and he refers to my “lack of respect for a voted outcome”.

(a) My contempt for Tasmania’s March electoral result is absolute. It was an utter fiasco. Don’t expect me to respect tyranny imposed by subterfuge and deceit-ridden manipulation, Simon.

(c) That wickedly contrived charade of an election was not the consequence of a free and informed vote, and consequently the result is invalid whether I believe it to be so or not.

(d) Not in almost 80 years have I ever known a single “fellow Tasmanian”.

Tyranny: cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control

Arbitrary: (of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority.

Posted by Peter Bright on 06/06/18 at 06:57 AM

#6 ... Still shows utter disrespect for over 50% of his “fellow Tasmanians”.

I suspect he no longer lives in Tasmania - and why would he with such a poor attitude?

Posted by TGC on 06/06/18 at 09:21 AM

Given the Hodgman Government’s anti-environment record, I have to agree with the message Cassy O’Connor is advocating!

This Government certainly assists its crony mates with unprecedented access of our island’s protected and contentious areas, thereby in my view compromising the integrity of what is unique and special about this state!

Posted by Teresa Maddox on 06/06/18 at 11:04 AM

“My contempt for Tasmania’s March electoral result is absolute. It was an utter fiasco. Don’t expect me to respect tyranny imposed by subterfuge and deceit-ridden manipulation”.

Yeah, right, whatever the result was. Or might have been.

Wonder how many readers (lots, I hope - if not, it’s time to worry bigtime!) have contempt for such an ‘absolutely’ irrational assessment of the vote, and by implication, the voters? And, seemingly, can’t distinguish between a (claimed as manipulated) election in our sort of society and the ‘absolute’ “deceit-ridden manipulation” in scores of self-styled elections in most of UN’s 200+ member states.

Remember how Soviet election official felt a sense of failure when routine ‘election’ results fell below 98% for CPSU’s (often sole) candidates? Plus, a worry about a widely known but rarely discussed practice of such failure meriting one-way tickets to ‘absolutely’ getting-away-from-it-all’ camps in their nation’s above-66dN Far East. Now, that’s tyranny at work.

#4’s assertion is little more than ‘absolutely’ absurd venting.

Posted by Leonard Colquhoun on 06/06/18 at 11:26 AM

How come no one in the government, the public service, or in business, EVER responds to critical comments in TT, or actually contributes via articles themselves?

Are they essentially illiterate, afraid of catching some horrible leprosy like stigmatizing disease such as “Viewed on Tasmanian Times Disease” or something even more horrific, or are they simply too arrogant to feel the need to explain themselves to concerned citizens?

How come the TT editor should have to publish a press release from Cassy O’Connor. Bloody hell Cassy, couldn’t you write an occasional dedicated article for Tasmanian Times yourself. Are you too embarrassed to acknowledge the existence of this amazing Tasmanian publication, or are you just too preoccupied with political spin to acknowledge sometimes the need for serious factual articles and objective comment. (ditto the rest of you apparent selfish, arrogant and inarticulate mongrels in the EPA, Dept State Growth and various councils.)

I just don’t understand the problem with all these agencies refusing to explain their viewpoint seriously via articles on their free local news medium, with heaps of readers and opportunity for exchange of ideas?

Hey, government ministers, how about if you enhance your chances of reelection by instructing your various departments to start properly communicating via Tasmanian Times in response to various queories and contentious issues?

Posted by Ivo Edwards on 06/06/18 at 01:18 PM

Overall Australia rated 12th out of 163 countries after Iceland, New Zealand, Portugal, Austria and Denmark in the 2017 Global Peace Index, with Syria the worst off.

I do not know what factors are taken into account in determining the Global Peace Index - for example, factors related to due diligence, social and cultural factors, reductions in violence against women, protection of civil society and good governance and so on.

However it does seem concerning that the current state and federal governments both favour a culture of neo-liberal expediency that has resulted in erosion of participatory planning and regulatory mechanisms and safeguards, as well as cuts in funding to vital bodies.

If we look at the big picture of the sustainable development goals, then looking after the earth and climate action are part of the journey.

Yes, world environment day - how about some protection for The Tarkine and standing up for the values of TWWHA while restore some funds to the threatened species unit for a start.

Posted by Mentor in prevention of violence on 06/06/18 at 02:27 PM

In answer to Comment 11’s (implied) question about “what factors are taken into account in determining the Global Peace Index”, I found that its Wikipedia entry has these points:

The Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP), is a global think tank headquartered in Sydney, Australia with branches in New York City, Mexico City and The Hague. The IEP is chaired by technology entrepreneur Steve Killelea founder of Integrated Research.

Organisation - IEP is dedicated to shifting the world’s focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress.

Partners - IEP works in partnership with a number of think tanks, NGOs and academic institutions including the Aspen Institute, Center for Strategic and International Studies, International Peace Institute, Open Society Foundations and Kings College. It also collaborates with intergovernmental organizations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Commonwealth Secretariat, UNDP, UNICEF, NATO, the World Bank Group and UN Peacebuilding Support Office.

It achieves its goals by developing global and national peace indices, calculating the economic cost of violence, analysing country level risk and understanding the conditions which underpin highly peaceful societies. (Google this article for more details)

# 4 ... What a complete load of hysterical bunkum. It doesn’t matter how cranky and deluded you have become in your sedentary rocking chair, you will never understand fire ecology.

The more you burn the more fire conducive vegetation you create. The best way to stop fires is not to consistently burn, but to retain buffing zones such as wet forest types, not burn the crap out of them.

Catastrophic conditions essentially means that no matter what you do it will be beyond control.

The reference to the Dunalley fire is desperate, and bereft of knowledge example. The Dunalley forest, given the same conditions, would burn again now because the fuel load from the previous fire is already established.

There is plenty of merit for burning forest near residential areas, but open slather burning just for the sake of it achieves nothing beyond the loss of biodiversity. But then again, who are you to understand the evolutionary processes of nature?

This is typical Liberal anthropocentric ideology that’s consistent with naïve and dogmatic scribbles of the Bible’s Genesis.

You consistently prattle on about we “have to realise that priorities have to be set to save our natural world with the continued regular and extensive use of fire.”

That sounds like it is straight out of the pyromaniac’s handbook of obliteration. Every thing you advocate is about destroying our natural world - not saving it.

~ par three: partly a rerun of pars one and two, and having heard enough MPs and others in the politics cosmos trying to talk [as distinct from ‘communicate’ (a word which gets far too much use and abuse) that it’s too easy to do a MUTE on them; am sick of coppers who #123 seem to have been ordered to] spout rubbish lingo like ‘a white male person aged about 15 and two white female persons of about the same age were observed behaving in a manner which appeared to threaten the security of an elderly female person in the nineties age group’;

~ last par: and am sick of politicos, bureaucrats and CEOs gushing stuff like ‘we take our responsibilities in (whatever) very seriously’ just after some dangerous snafu or quasi-criminal carry-on, not forgetting the almost mandatory ‘we have zero tolerance for [XYZ]’.

If that’s all that lot can say, better they remain quiet.

Posted by Leonard Colquhoun on 06/06/18 at 04:19 PM

#7 ... I could not help but notice your prejudice, Trevor.

Have you concluded that because Mr Bright is so forthright and intelligent in his views he cannot possibly be a resident of this corrupt Isle we call Tasmania?

Perhaps he does live in Tasmania and is therefore very qualified to espouse his personal view about the very sad dilemma of this State where we have generational issues of education, ethics, morality and care for anything other than the destruction of this island that Attenborough praised.

Posted by Geoffrey Swan on 06/06/18 at 10:34 PM

#4 ... I have to agree with Ted in #13. He couldn’t have said it better.

Honestly Robin, what you don’t know .. you make up.

Forgive me for thinking you were after a crown for trolling.

Back to school for you!

Posted by Clive Stott on 06/06/18 at 11:55 PM

#13 Mead and #16 Stott ... Neither of you want to face the realities of managing natural resources for fire protection using fire itself as the tool for its management, for example the Giblin River “wildfire” which is within the SW WHA during Jan 2013 and covered an area of 45,000ha.

According to valid reports a FRB previously 2 years before had stopped this “wildfire” near Settlement Point and Heather Bay. Had this FRB not been conducted it was likely this fire would have burnt to Bathurst Harbour and Mt Rugby and increased the “wildfire” by 15,000-20,000ha.

By the way, The Giblin River “wildfire” burnt mainly on Button grass plains and scrub country. Some eucalypt forest was burnt but no rainforest was burnt despite “screaming Greens” reports at the time to the contrary!

In effect, given it was the wrong time of the year for FRB, its origins were believed to have been a lightning strike during what was a bad fire season in the same year as the Dunalley disaster. The Giblin River fire was, in fact, a massive self regulating fuel reduction burn within a remote region of Tasmania where it was unlikely that suppression was required.

Suck it up folks, as we are not living within an environmental bubble as former leaders, like Peg Putt of the Greens, who led both a gullible public and other members of Parliament to believe post 1967 Southern Tasmanian fire pre Dunalley fire 2013 leaving her “no burning” legacy as a the natural management “mess” that is only being addressed post Dunalley 2013 where the fire authorities will continue to play catch-up using reduction burning as a tool to have some control over future wildfires in the State.

Post settlement from 215 years ago, when aboriginal fire stick farming practice was under threat by change due to white settlement, we today are still adapting to a changed land management regime that politics continually interferes with, especially those ridiculous aspirations of the Greens and their supporters.

We must continue with extensive FRB practices that are planned and regulated for better environmental outcomes to reduce the longer term effects, damage and the costs of suppressing wildfires across our landscape.

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 07/06/18 at 03:02 AM

#17, Pyro Robin ... Apart from the Giblin fire being ignited by natural causes, you are wrong on all accounts again!

The Giblin fire wasn’t in the same year as the Dunalley fire!

No mention of the extensive Dougherty Range and valley fire out there prior to that which had a similar history. What about the Gallagher plains/ Huon River, or the Cracroft /Athur Plains fire, or the Spiro Range fire? All big, and all naturally ignited in recent times. Mostly they didn’t burn into the wet forests, and there were no FRB anywhere near those places, yet ecologically there was minimal damage to the region.

You see, you talk pyromanical garbage with your disturbing sickness to wantonly stike matches willy-nilly all over the state!

You are merely speculating that fires in the south-west were managed by fire-stick farming, when lightning strikes are a more natural and frequent phenomenon. The Aboriginal people would have burnt some areas for a number of reasons, not for the maintenance of ecological values.

Actually there were no screaming Greens reports at that time as you claim, but there would have been plenty of individuals concerned about the expanding potential of the Giblin fire moving across the alpine zones.

There was rainforest burnt in that Giblin fire, and most of that was in the alpine regions such as Mt Hesperus/Lake Fortuna and Mt Robinson where the alpine leatherwood and other endemics were lost, but a whining geriatric like you couldn’t get off the rocker and walk out there for a look, could you?

The Mt Rugby and Settlement point areas have a history of fire, and to claim any unsubstantiated FRB saved the south-west is ludicrous and obsessively loopy.

Everybody knows it doesn’t matter how many resources you waste in trying to avoid another catastrophic wildfire because it won’t make a blink of difference come the day, and it will come bigger than before due to climate change and the myopic forestry practices of removing wet forest buffer areas.

So what’s next in your fire obsessive thinking .. getting cremated and spreading you ashes over some derelict failed forestry regen burn?

How pathetically apt that would be!

Posted by Ted Mead on 07/06/18 at 09:50 AM

About Comment #18’s reference to “The Aboriginal people would have burnt some areas for a number of reasons, not for the maintenance of ecological values” - it was good to read a refutation of the Pollyanna-fying of pre-1788 life, and the (implied) rubbishing of J J Rousseau ‘noble savage’ fantasising, which is as infantile an interpretation of primitive life as could ever be dreamed up by a academic gaggle of Morons R Us.

My history teacher in Form III or IV reckoned that JJ had never met any real savages! Of course, this old now-dead white male closet ‘racist’ never had the benefits of a 21st century Arts / Humanities credential!

Ted fails to take into account the entire West Coast including the South West presents with inflammable vegetation types such as vast areas of button grass that are dependent on either human interaction or lightning strikes to burn these areas on a REGULAR basis to prevent spread beyond their natural boundaries into wetter type forests where environmental damage can occur.

Patterns of SW fire management by PWS need to take into consideration both an inter dependency on lightning strikes to create reduction fires as well as strategic aerial fuel reduction to supplement areas not ignited over a longer period of time in order to keep high fuel loads down to lessen risk to the surrounding natural environment.

Post settlement we do not have aboriginal people using their own traditional fire-stick techniques to manage this landscape for their own needs, or to travel along seasonal routes to access their varied food sources.

Dependence on lightning strikes, the source of wildfire/reduction burns, cannot be depended on entirely as there is always the risk of these fires driven by prolonged hard winds coming from the prevailing weather off the Indian Ocean that could travel across land into settled areas of the state.

Chances are a once in 400-500 year fire could occur again during this century, thereby creating those infernos that created the Florentine, Styx, and the widespread Huon forests across the divide.

I believe the first recorded major wide spread wildfire occurred in 1854 in the Huon, and became a serious impediment to European settlement.

Extensive and regular fuel reduction is an essential feature of living in Australia today, and we must be prepared to act with rapid responses.

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 07/06/18 at 08:39 PM

#22, Robin ... I just read your comment. What a load of wrong-headed and false ideas. I suggest that you need to get a proper education.

Posted by Jon Sumby on 07/06/18 at 09:49 PM

#23 Jon, and where does my assessment of West Coast/Sw Cnr fire management strategy not measure up to your standards .. what ever they might be?

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 08/06/18 at 07:31 AM

#15 ... It’s important for there be the ‘prejudiced’ to allow the ‘unprejudiced’ to thrive.

Posted by TGC on 08/06/18 at 08:52 AM

#24 and #23” - beat me to it! (unsurprisingly)

Posted by Leonard Colquhoun on 08/06/18 at 09:04 AM

Re #3 ... Hi Peter. For a fire to exist it must have air, fuel and heat/spark. Take one of them away, or starve them of one, and you no longer have a fire or the opportunity for a fire to start.

Posted by Russell on 08/06/18 at 09:58 AM

Humans already impact the environment on levels none of us fully understand! It’s a shame all the “experts” don’t have crystal balls. They might view the world quite differently if they did!

To date, no-one has been able to tame the forces of Nature, so how do any of us know what is necessary to prevent the next disaster? Perhaps we need to stop playing God!

Posted by Teresa Maddox on 08/06/18 at 10:10 AM

Comment #28’s (emotive) claim “To date, no-one has been able to tame the forces of Nature” deserves close analysis.

Item 1: What, exactly, is physically meant by “tame”? Does it include our current (aka “to date”) level of ability to predict natural events (such as our hugely improved ability to do this for tsunamis^) and then to make preparations for dealing with these “forces of Nature”?

Item 2: What, exactly, is physically meant by “forces of Nature”? Does it include our vastly improved understanding of the laws of physics in, say, fluid dynamics and tectonic plate movements?

^ BTW, here’s a curly PC question: Should we Anglo-Celtics / Whites / Euros / gaijin be chided for ‘appropriating’ the Japanese word “tsunami” [津波, if you want it in the original] in this discourse? Wouldn’t this be a case of the recently uncovered ‘sin’ of micro-racism?

I could have missed it in all the forest mist, but did Sir David mention that over half-a-million people live on this wilderness island, and that there are (relatively) substantial industries and thriving and diverse agricultural practices of a world-class standard, not to mention so much the activities well beyond “wilderness”.

Posted by TGC on 08/06/18 at 02:52 PM

#29 ... Why you feel the need to analyse my comment is rather amusing!

Can’t you grasp the concept that up to now, mere mortals haven’t been able to control natural, catastrophic events?

Your talk of tsunamis and “ability to predict these natural events” perhaps allows one to get out of harm’s way, but this doesn’t stop this destructive force of nature from happening and so I’m unsure where your analysis was heading.

Posted by Teresa Maddox on 08/06/18 at 04:08 PM

Attenbro’s voice over is to sell some footage for the filmmaker.

In #3 it is claimed that democracy is the best system we have (Churchill put it better) but it does require more than simply the freedom to be involved. It also requires being informed, respecting others and ensuring that each decision is thought through as carefully as we can to ensure the future is not foreclosed.

This #32 aspiration “It also requires being informed, respecting others and ensuring that each decision is thought through as carefully as we can to ensure the future is not foreclosed” is as good a guide as any for everyone doing their civic duty.

Now, if only we could get our “unrepresentative swill” to follow it!

BTW, elections have two main purposes: (i) so We the People can choose a representative assembly and (ii), for it to produce a governing administration. With (i) without (ii), we get endless scheming, horse-trading and yabber-yabber (“full of sound and fury signifying nothing”); with (ii) at the expense of (i), we get (to use the term beloved of Indonesia’s first president Soekarno) ‘guided democracy’, as in Plato’s philosopher-kings, Iran’s theocrats, the communist party’s ‘leading role’ in the former USSR and newly enforced in Xi’s China, and in maybe half the UN member nations.

It will be interesting, alerting, and even alarming to see what our clever and credentialed would come up with to ‘guide’ our parliaments - particularly from those who no longer bother to hide their contempt for their deplorable ‘masses’.

Posted by Leonard Colquhoun on 15/06/18 at 12:52 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Before you submit your comment, please make sure that it complies with Tasmanian Times Code of Conduct.